Articles | Volume 17, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024
Development and technical paper
 | 
16 Feb 2024
Development and technical paper |  | 16 Feb 2024

Numerical coupling of aerosol emissions, dry removal, and turbulent mixing in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 1 (EAMv1) – Part 2: A semi-discrete error analysis framework for assessing coupling schemes

Christopher J. Vogl, Hui Wan, Carol S. Woodward, and Quan M. Bui

Related authors

Numerical coupling of aerosol emissions, dry removal, and turbulent mixing in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 1 (EAMv1) – Part 1: Dust budget analyses and the impacts of a revised coupling scheme
Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Christopher J. Vogl, Carol S. Woodward, Richard C. Easter, Philip J. Rasch, Yan Feng, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1387–1407, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Numerical methods
Advances in land surface forecasting: a comparison of LSTM, gradient boosting, and feed-forward neural networks as prognostic state emulators in a case study with ecLand
Marieke Wesselkamp, Matthew Chantry, Ewan Pinnington, Margarita Choulga, Souhail Boussetta, Maria Kalweit, Joschka Bödecker, Carsten F. Dormann, Florian Pappenberger, and Gianpaolo Balsamo
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 921–937, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025, 2025
Short summary
Subgrid corrections for the linear inertial equations of a compound flood model – a case study using SFINCS 2.1.1 Dollerup release
Maarten van Ormondt, Tim Leijnse, Roel de Goede, Kees Nederhoff, and Ap van Dongeren
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 843–861, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025, 2025
Short summary
Introducing Iterative Model Calibration (IMC) v1.0: a generalizable framework for numerical model calibration with a CAESAR-Lisflood case study
Chayan Banerjee, Kien Nguyen, Clinton Fookes, Gregory Hancock, and Thomas Coulthard
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 803–818, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025, 2025
Short summary
Development of a high-order global dynamical core using the discontinuous Galerkin method for an atmospheric large-eddy simulation (LES) and proposal of test cases: SCALE-DG v0.8.0
Yuta Kawai and Hirofumi Tomita
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 725–762, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025, 2025
Short summary
A joint reconstruction and model selection approach for large-scale linear inverse modeling (msHyBR v2)
Malena Sabaté Landman, Julianne Chung, Jiahua Jiang, Scot M. Miller, and Arvind K. Saibaba
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8853–8872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8853-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8853-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Barrett, A. I., Wellmann, C., Seifert, A., Hoose, C., Vogel, B., and Kunz, M.: One Step at a Time: How Model Time Step Significantly Affects Convection-Permitting Simulations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 641–658, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001418, 2019. a
Caya, A., Laprise, R., and Zwack, P.: Consequences of Using the Splitting Method for Implementing Physical Forcings in a Semi-Implicit Semi-Lagrangian Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 126, 1707–1713, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1998)126<1707:COUTSM>2.0.CO;2, 1998. a
Donahue, A. S. and Caldwell, P. M.: Performance and Accuracy Implications of Parallel Split Physics-Dynamics Coupling in the Energy Exascale Earth System Atmosphere Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002080, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002080, 2020. a
Dubal, M., Wood, N., and Staniforth, A.: Analysis of Parallel versus Sequential Splittings for Time-Stepping Physical Parameterizations, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 121–132, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2004)131<0121:AOPVSS>2.0.CO;2, 2004. a
Dubal, M., Wood, N., and Staniforth, A.: Mixed Parallel-Sequential-Split Schemes for Time-Stepping Multiple Physical Parameterizations, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 989–1002, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2893.1, 2005. a
Short summary
Generally speaking, accurate climate simulation requires an accurate evolution of the underlying mathematical equations on large computers. The equations are typically formulated and evolved in process groups. Process coupling refers to how the evolution of each group is combined with that of other groups to evolve the full set of equations for the whole atmosphere. This work presents a mathematical framework to evaluate methods without the need to first implement the methods.
Share